Pa.’s constable system is a mess. How to fix it
State officials have been talking for years about improving the accountability of constables.
Some changes were made about a decade ago, but clearly more must be done.
The Morning Call’s Peter Hall recently highlighted how local constables have been elected despite brushes with the law and questions about their residency.
His research showed that some people who seek election as constable seem to be interested in the title only. They don’t seek the certification needed to perform all of the duties they are eligible to carry out, such as serving court papers.
Others may be attracted by the fact that if they do get certified, they qualify as a law enforcement officer and can carry a concealed firearm anywhere in the country.
Here are three ideas to improve the system:
* Require constables to be state-certified to run for office.
Critics will howl that’s unfair. But constables should be held to a higher standard because of the duties they can perform, including serving warrants, transporting prisoners and providing court security.
Oh, and being armed.
The 80-hour basic training and firearms certification costs about $2,600 through the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency. Forcing candidates to make that commitment prior to election might weed out those who are seeking the title only.
There rarely is a contested race for constable in Lehigh County. So the investment should rarely be wasted.
The Morning Call’s investigation found that only nine of the 26 constables elected in November in Lehigh County were certified to do work for the courts and carry a gun. In Northampton County, 15 of the 69 constables elected in November were certified to work for the courts and carry a gun.
Statewide, in 2020, about 64% of constables had completed basic certification, and less than half had completed firearms training.
* Require all candidates for public office, including constable, to submit a state police background check to their county election office.
The Pennsylvania Constitution prohibits anyone convicted of embezzlement of public money; bribery; perjury; or another “infamous crime” from “holding any office of trust or profit in this Commonwealth.”
The courts have determined that all felonies are considered an infamous crime, according to guidance from the Department of State’s election office. But that hasn’t been universally applied.
Elections officials may howl at having another task thrust upon them. But this shouldn’t be too time consuming.
Anyone who submits a background check with a felony or embezzlement/bribery/perjury conviction would be referred to the district attorney. The DA would then decide whether to petition the court to remove them from the ballot.
In January, a judge ruled that the winner of a write-in campaign for constable in Allentown was ineligible to serve because of his criminal record. The DA petitioned the court after The Morning Call wrote about the candidate’s background.
* Require all candidates, for all offices, to submit proof of residency before they can be sworn in.
Last month, the Lehigh district attorney asked the court to declare an Allentown constable ineligible to hold elected office in Pennsylvania. The DA said an investigation showed the constable’s actual address is in New Jersey.
Monroe County authorities raised similar allegations against a constable there a few years ago.
Some of these proposals would require amending the state Constitution. That used to be a pretty rare process, but not anymore. So it shouldn’t be considered too burdensome.
State lawmakers have proposed many amendments in the past few years. Many of them have political motives. Amendments to improve the constable system would be done in the name of good government and public safety, and should have bipartisan support.
In 2013, the state Supreme Court released new standards for constables, including allowing county courts to set up a constable review board to resolve disputes regarding a constable’s judicial duties.
The standards require constables to wear clothing that clearly identifies them when they are performing judicial duties. The standards dictate procedures for transporting prisoners and providing security at district courts; prohibitions on political activity; confidentiality; and general professionalism.
The Supreme Court called on the Legislature to consider additional rules, such as whether someone convicted of a first-degree misdemeanor or who is required to register as a sex offender should be allowed to work as a constable.
No action was taken.
Nearly a decade has passed. It’s time to review the constable system again and reform it further. Some of these changes would help to improve all elections, by ensuring that all candidates meet eligibility standards.